Allowed

Sai Service Station Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Dept of Revenue, Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Jun 2014WP/1741/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction, set aside impugned CBDT orders. It directed the petitioner to modify their application to specifically seek rectification under Section 154 and directed CBDT to grant a hearing and dispose of the matter within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside. Petitioner directed to modify application for rectification under Section 154. CBDT directed to grant hearing and decide within 12 weeks.

Sai Service Station Ltd. Vs Central Board of Direct… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

RNG 1 wp1741.13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.1741 OF 2013

¶4

Sai Service Station Ltd .. Petitioner

¶5

vs.

¶6

Central Board of Direct Taxes Department of Revenue & Ors .. Respondents

¶7

Mr.Mihir C.Naniwadekar for Petitioner Mr.Vimal Gupta Sr Advocate i/b Ms.Padma Divakar for Respondents

¶8

... CORAM : M.S.SANKLECHA AND G.S.KULKARNI,JJ DATE : 10 JUNE 2014

¶9

PC.

¶10

This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the orders of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Authorised by CBDT) dated 6.6.2012 and 5.9.2012. The impugned orders refuse to exercise the discretion vested in CBDT under section 119 (2) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) with regard to the Petitioner's claim that it be allowed to avail credit of the taxes deducted in determining tax payable on income for A.Y.2003-04 as there was a delay in obtaining/submitting the TDS certificates.

¶11

RNG 2 wp1741.13

¶12

After having heard the matter for sometime, Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the petitioner be allowed to either modify its application and/or file a fresh application to the Central Board of Direct Taxes under section 119 (2) (b) of the Act seeking a specific direction that their application for rectification of the Assessment order dated 29.3.2006 for A.Y. 2003-04 be admitted and direct the assessing officer to deal on merits.

¶13

We find that the application filed by the Petitioner under section 119 (2) (b) of the Act was for suitable directions to be given to the Officers so as to consider the Petitioner's claim for credit of TDS certificate and consequent refund. However, the impugned orders have not considered the application of the petitioner in light of the limitation provided under section 154 of the Act. We are of the view that normally there is no gain to be obtained by an assessee in not submitting the TDS certificate in time with the authorities and the same should be factored in while disposing of the application under section 119 (2) (b) of the Act.

¶14

In view of the above, we pass the following order :

¶15

(i) The impugned orders dated 6.6.2012 and 5.9.2012 are set aside ; (ii) The Petitioner to modify the present Application dated 8.6.2009 made to the Central Board of Direct Taxes within a

¶16

RNG 3 wp1741.13

¶17

period of two weeks from today and specifically seek admission of its rectification application under section 154 of the Act; and

¶18

(iii) The Chief Commissioner for Income Tax in exercise of powers delegated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes will grant to the Petitioners a personal hearing and dispose of the application within a period of 12 weeks from the date of modification of application dated 8.6.2009.

¶19

Petition disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs.

¶20

(M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)

¶21

(G.S.KULKARNI, J.)

¶22

RNG 4 wp1741.13

¶23

Rider :

¶24

In view of the fact that the Central Board of Direct Taxes has misdirected itself while dealing with the Application under section 119 (2) (b) of the Act, we set aside the impugned orders dated 6.6.2012 and 5.9.2012. The Central Board of Direct Taxes to pass fresh orders on Application dated 8.6.2009 filed by the Petitioner as modified in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of the Application. All contentions of the parties are left open.

Sai Service Station Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Dept of Revenue, Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sai Service Station Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Dept of Revenue, Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Cafe Noormani and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/s. Sunil Hotels Private Limited Vs the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai and Anr.

Chankya Mandal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Carmel Haven Vs the Commissioner of Income-Tax-I, Pune and Ors.

M/S Allanasons Ltd. Vs the Deputy Commissione of INCOME-TAX,CIRCLE-1 (1)